DISPATCHES FROM A MULTICULTURAL COUNTRY PAGE 8

Price: £3

APRIL 2007

UN MANIPULATES INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE

Lebanon: a court

without the law

A climate of distrust reigns in Lebanon, the scene of a silent civil war. The status of the international criminal court invented to prosecute the killers of the prime minister, Rafi k Hariri, is part of the problem, further complicating the formation of a government of national unity.

BY GÉRAUD DE GEOUFFRE DE LA PRADELLE, ANTOINE KORKMAZ AND RAFAËLLE MAISON

DR

JAROSLAW MODZELEWSKI: ‘A Forgotten Welder’ (1994)

Polish witchhunt

THE Poles call it the law of lustration, a term meaning ritual purification;

the word has strong connotations of repentance and penitence in Poland,

where history and Catholicism are so closely intertwined.

Under the law, which was passed last October and entered into force on 15 March

this year, 700,000 Poles are required to confess any collaboration with the communists

between 1945 and 1989. All senior civil servants, university professors, lawyers, headmas

ters and journalists born before 1972 must now confess their past sins by 15 May.

They must all fi ll in a form and answer the question: “Did you secretly and knowingly

collaborate with the former communist security services?” The forms must be handed to

their immediate superiors, who will forward them to the Institute of National Memory in Warsaw, which will check its records and issue a certifi cate of political purity. Journal

ists employed in any public service will be dismissed automatically if they collaborated.

Anyone who refuses to answer the question or who is proved to have lied may be banned

from their profession for 10 years. This mad law, which is causing uproar in

the European Union, makes the McCarthyites of the United States in the 1950s look like

amateurs at the practise of anti-communism. It is the main feature of a witchhunt launched

by the authorities after the conservative president, Lech Kaczynski, and his twin brother,

prime minister Jaroskaw Kaczynski, came to power in Poland in October 2005. Many Poles consider the law to be unconstitutional because it requires citizens

to prove that they did not do something. It may be quashed by the Constitutional Court,

which will deliver its verdict in May. The ruling rightwing, Catholic and

nationalist coalition (the Kaczynski broth

ers’ Law and Justice party, the agrarian Self Defence party and the League of Polish Fami

lies) is pursuing a disturbing policy of tough enforcement of moral values. Roman Giertych,

deputy prime minister, minister of education and leader of the League, has just tabled a

homophobic bill, causing more international uproar and protests from human rights

organisations. Under the bill, which could be presented within a month, any person disclos

ing their homosexuality “or any other sexual deviation” in a university or scholastic estab

lishment would be liable to a fi ne, dismissal or a term of imprisonment.

The minister’s father, the League MEP Maciej Giertych, caused protests in February

when he published an antisemitic pamphlet, paid for by the European parliament and

issued under its logo, containing such statements as “the Jews create their own ghettos”

and “antisemitism is not racism”. These anti-communist purges and attempts

to reimpose an authoritarian moral order in Poland — and also to some extent in Ukraine,

Lithuania and other countries formerly in the eastern bloc — conceal a worrying nos

talgia for the period before the second world war, when racism was blatant. Some of those

caught up in the current wave of revisionism go as far as extolling collaboration with the

Third Reich against the Soviet Union. The idea, so popular with the media, that

Putin’s Russia is merely a covert extension of the old USSR inspires the spirit that prompted Warsaw to agree to instal on Polish territory the anti-missile shield designed by the Pen

tagon to protect the United States. It did that without deigning to consult its partners in the

EU and Nato. Which goes to show that paranoia in politics can lead not only to spiritual

atrophy but also to a special form of treachery. IGNACIO RAMONET

TRANSLATED BY BARBARA WILSON

THE United Nations Security Council began an exceptional

international investigation after the death of the Lebanese prime

minister, Rafik Hariri, in a bomb attack on 14 February 2005. It may lead to a special

tribunal with extraordinary powers. There is nothing surprising about this; consider

the jurisdictions established by the UN, or under its aegis, for former Yugoslavia,

Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Cambodia (1). But in the case of Lebanon there are no actual

international crimes to prosecute. Several aspects of the investigation suggest that

international justice is being manipulated. It is too fragile to endure such ill treatment. We should be in no doubt about the political nature of the Security Council. The UN Char

ter established it that way. The council enjoys far-reaching discretionary powers, with few

legal checks or balances on its actions. However, under the pretence of upholding the law,

there have been serious violations of civil liberties, while nothing has been done to resolve

the situation in Lebanon. This is particularly so with the Hariri investigation. The special

tribunal is still no more than a project, yet it is already worsening tension.

The Security Council set up the international independent investigation commis

sion (IIIC) at the instigation of Beirut. It was to be headed by a German prosecutor, Detlev Mehlis (2). UN Resolution 1595 of 7 April 2005

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

Iraq: where did all the money for

reconstruction go? page 3

US: the second destruction of the

city of New Orleans page 4

France: does it have a foreign

policy? And if so, what? page 6

France: a change in the code that

regulates society page 7

Ghana: it’s not really a champion

of African excellence page 10

instructed the commission to assist the Lebanese authorities in “identifying the perpetra

tors” of the terrorist bomb that killed Hariri and called “for the strict respect of the sover

eignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and

exclusive authority of the government”. But it also noted that “the Lebanese investigation

process suff ers from serious fl aws and has neither the capacity nor the commitment to reach

a satisfactory and credible conclusion”. On 3 June 2005 the UN and Beirut signed

an agreement settling the terms for their cooperation. The IIIC would supervise the

work of the Lebanese authorities, which were relegated to a secondary role. The commis

sion would not restrict itself to independent fact-fi nding, but carry out a complete criminal

investigation. None of the usual checks and balances applied. Lebanese authorities, espe

cially the courts, could no longer act on their own initiative, their role being to answer the

IIIC’s questions. In Resolution 1636, adopted on 19 October

2005 after the IIIC’s presentation of its fi rst report, the Security Council commended the

Lebanese authorities for their full cooperation and congratulated them on “the coura

geous decisions they have already taken . . . upon recommendation of the commission,

in particular the arrest and indictment of

Continued on page 2

Uganda: an impossible test case for

the internation court page 11

Vietnam: the booming economy

and reticent politicians page 12

Japan: a problematic shrine of

national military honour page 13

Debate: on the freedom of speech

and expression page 14

Mediterranean: bring back the

working mule and donkey page 16